User talk:Espoo/Archive 5

GOCE 2014 report
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:55, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited International Phonetic Alphabet, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Daniel Jones. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:42, 7 January 2015 (UTC)

February 2015 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

GOCE March newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:41, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

Technical move of Speak Softly, Love
Regarding your request at WP:RMTR. This can surely be done as a technical move, but your rationale is very brief: " incorrect meaning when (very commonly) incorrectly punctuated". What does this title look like when incorrectly punctuated? And what is the key evidence provided in the book you mention? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 14:57, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

I didn't think i needed to say it's punctuated incorrectly in the old title and correctly in the new and that the only difference in punctuation is the added comma. --Espoo (talk) 19:18, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

April 2015 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:28, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Requested move
Hi there. Just to let you know that in my view, your requested move of X-ray computed tomography → CT scan is unlikely to be uncontroversial given that there are 293 page watchers for a reasonably high traffic article. As a result I've declined the request and started a discussion at the source article's talk page. Best, Philg88 ♦talk 21:53, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

May 2015
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=664146159 your edit] to Hermeneutics may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:24, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Hermeneutics or   Random House Unabridged Dictionary is the

GOCE June 2015 newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Style in your "Anno domini" edits
In this series of edits you have attempted to improve the capitalization style in the "Anno Domini" article, but at the same time you have introduced a number of bare url citations. WP:CITEVAR spells out the Wikipedia-wide understanding that bare url citations are undesireable. Please modify your edit so that you do not introduce one style error at the same time you try to correct another style error. Also, please do not cite the Wikipedia "Manual of Style" in an article since it is not a reliable source. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:26, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Chairman of ways and means
I do not, in the least, agree with your move of "Chairman of Ways and Means" to "Chairman of ways and means" (and the related moves for similarly titled articles). The Chairman of Ways and Means, Committee on Ways and Means, and related terms are proper nouns, all of whose principal words are capitalized. For official usage in the UK, see, for example, here. The form you have introduced is not conventional and in fact I have never seen it used anyway.

I would appreciate your reverting this and any similar moves. Thank you. Newyorkbrad (talk) 22:19, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, this is a clear case of MOS:JOBTITLES. We don't need to and shouldn't follow "official" usage when this would violate our manual of style, which clearly requires the following: Chairman of Ways and Means John Doe is the first chairman of ways and means from Wales.

In addition, it's no coincidence that the BBC doesn't follow the outdated usage of the UK parliament, which uppercases all job titles (job titles are *not* proper nouns), and instead employs a less medieval style, which incidentally is arguably at least as "official". (The concept of BBC English is well established whereas the same cannot be said of "Parliament English".) --Espoo (talk) 03:59, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I understand the formal point you are making, but the uncapitalized usage is so jarring and unconventional that I must continue to disagree with you. The term "Chairman of Ways and Means" is short, at least historically, for "Chairman of [the Committee on] Ways and Means," which reflects that it is a proper noun. Also, "ways" and "means" in this context are common enough words that the term could be confusing if uncapitalized.
 * Was there any discussion of the change you made before you made it? If so, please point me there, because I do not see it. If not, my inclination is still to revert the move as disputed, and ask you to start a formal move request if you want to pursue this. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 04:26, 19 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I understand that seeing something spelled in a way that violates a spelling convention one has become used to can be jarring. (Just imagine what most US Americans feel when they see all WP article titles and subheadings without capitals.) But the reason we have a manual of style is so that we don't have to rediscuss the same issues dozens of times in thousands of articles. So if you feel strongly about this issue and want an exception added to the current policy, *please* discuss the issue on the talk page of MOS:JOBTITLES, not on this article's talk page.
 * Please tell me what your reading experience was when you saw the lowercase spelling on the BBC webpage. Was it more or less jarring to see it on an "official website" than on a wiki? --Espoo (talk) 04:55, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I think the spelling with the lower-case looks odd, although the specific example you ask me about may not be a fair test, since I went to the article for the specific purpose of finding that spelling.
 * Meanwhile, I see the pages were moved back by someone else, not prompted by me. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 15:19, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Moving Burma to Myanmar - new 2015 poll
You participated in a Burma RM in the past so I'm informing you of another RM. I hope I didn't miss anyone. New move attempt of Burma>Myanmar Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:30, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

There is a move discussion in progress on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Burma (Myanmar) which affects the recently renamed page Myanmar. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. Sawol (talk) 16:34, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

GOCE August 2015 newsletter

 * sent by via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:43, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

September 2015
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=679079994 your edit] to Modern Greek may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:04, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * , but before the mid or close front vowels and  , it is pronounced  (or  and  in some dialects, notably

Renaming and moving of Plato articles
Hello Espoo. I want you to know that removing standard capitalization from the proper names of Platonic terms and moving their related articles is very wrong. These are not generic words but the title of topics, like the title of books and journal articles. You wouldn't want everyone's names thus edited and re-published according to a poorly thought out Wiki guideline. These modifications should all be reversed. BlueMist (talk) 21:06, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Hi BlueMist. The situation is not at all a clear-cut case, as you believe. (And topics ["titles of topics"] and journal titles are very different things and, more importantly, both not capitalized in almost all publications.) Many reliable sources do not capitalize these concepts, so there is no reason to violate our manual of style or make an exception to it. Please see Talk:Allegory_of_the_Cave for more details. --Espoo (talk) 20:55, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 10
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Payroll, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bonus. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:07, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 23
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nominative determinism, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Rebirth and Pleasure principle. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:47, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

October 2015 GOCE newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:55, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

January 2016
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=701319273 your edit] to Pseudonym may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 ""s. If you have, don't worry: just [ edit the page] again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/BBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/BBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=BracketBot%20–%20&section=new my operator's talk page].
 * List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:30, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 * . Pseudonyms include stage names and user names both called screen names, ring names, pen names, nicknames, aliases, superhero

Your edit on Geats
Hello. I have modified your edit; "gi:ts" may be the most common pronounciation in the US but that doesn't automatically mean it should be listed first, especially since it's actually wrong: the OE pronounciation was much closer to "geɪəts"/"jeɪəts"... Thomas.W talk 17:43, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks :-)
Thanks for reverting my derp edit. I didn't see that more changes were made (I thought that spacing was the only thing changed. Anyways, thanks again.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:28, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Polyclinic (disambiguation) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Polyclinic (disambiguation) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Outpatient clinic (hospital department) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Bicarbonate
Thanks for this edit, which explained something I had wondered about for a very long time. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:15, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Postdoc
I get the feeling that we have different ideas about what the nomenclature represents here. "Postdoctoral student" is incorrect because postdocs are never students, but are actually employees. The term "postdoc" is also not used to refer to people who have strictly teaching positions, thus the term does necessarily imply a research position. At least these are true in the United States; if European usage is different then we have to deal with that somehow. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 18:25, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Did you take a look at this link provided in the article? https://postdocs.cornell.edu/structure-postdoctoral-study --Espoo (talk) 18:31, 3 April 2016 (UTC)


 * That source certainly does not say that postdocs are students. Upon further research it does appear that there are postdoctoral teaching fellowships, though those are much rarer than the research type.  These teaching fellowships might be better discussed in a different article though, as the scope of the Postdoctoral researcher article has always been focused on research, rather than any of the other various things one can do in academia after receiving a Ph.D. Antony–22 (talk⁄contribs) 18:39, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

It most certainly does: "A postdoc is a person who has received a doctoral degree and who is pursuing additional research, training, or teaching...". A person who has received a doctoral degree and who is pursuing training is most definitely a student. They may also be working as a researcher on their own or as employees of another university, but they are postdoctoral students, not postdoctoral researchers, at the institution where they are pursuing training. --Espoo (talk) 19:03, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors April 2016 Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:48, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Obama
The full sentence is:
 * "On December 22, 2010, Obama signed the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010, fulfilling a key promise made in the 2008 presidential campaign to end the Don't ask, don't tell policy of 1993 that had prevented gay and lesbian people from serving openly in the United States Armed Forces."

Please don't change it again. -- Scjessey (talk) 16:52, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Scjessey is completely correct here. Please stop changing it, Espoo. Tvoz / talk 17:09, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Gays have always served as openly in the military as anyone else, and it would be rude to imply otherwise. What they were prevented from doing is being open about being gay. They were prevented from serving openly gay, not from serving openly. --Espoo (talk) 06:40, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * It's not rudeness; it's English. You can't have "gay people serving openly gay" in any legitimate sentence. It makes no sense. In fact, it sounds like gay people serving gay people, which is even weirder. -- Scjessey (talk) 16:21, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * They are correct. Read the entire sentence please and don't change it again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coradon (talk • contribs) 14:26, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors September 2016 News
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:36, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 14
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited UK Youth, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages CSR and Charity. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Tablet Image
Hi. I would like to transfer this image File:Dispilio_tablet.jpg to Commons. You've uploaded it stating that there is a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License in the source but I couldn't find any. Could you please tell me the free source. --Мико (talk) 13:42, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi. I see you have seen this and you are quiet about it so I took a look. There is a copyright sign in the beginning of the article you took the image from, so I intend to put a speedy deletion tag on the image, if you don't mind.--Алиса Селезньова (talk) 15:02, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, that was a year ago and was the first time i uploaded an image to WP, and i remember i was quite overwhelmed by both the technical and legal aspects. I again spent quite a bit of time now trying to understand the legal aspects and trying to remember what i had understood a year ago. As you can see, i put the link https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/radiocarbon/article/view/17456 in the permission box. I can't remember what my reasoning was, but i think it was that the paper is freely available and that its authors will surely consider use of one image from the paper to be fair use since the source is clearly cited and since the image is essential for understanding the Wikipedia article. Scientists want their findings to be as widely known as possible. Quoting passages and using a small number of charts or images is definitely not something they are opposed to. I didn't answer Мико yet because i spent time trying to understand WP policy and because i'm in the process of writing to the authors of the paper for permission to use the image. --Espoo (talk) 15:32, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Great! Thanks for the effort - it'll be really good to have the image. And since your are writing them - ask for permission to upoad the other images as well - at least the "signed" pottery. Thanks. --Мико (talk) 11:40, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

The Arsonists
Hi Espoo, just an FYI, I took your specific request to 7-day RM, as I believe a discussion with consensus will be more convincing than a possibly questionable technical request. — Andy W. ( talk ) 00:30, 16 November 2016 (UTC)